6 ms·

You mean the admin that funded and fast-tracked the development and trials?

by throwaway201103 6y ago

pmiller2 6y ago
You mean the admin that encouraged people not to wear masks? The one that downplayed the virus at every opportunity? The one that held rallies without masks required, but still had people sign waivers in case they got sick? Is it that one, or some other administration you’re thinking of?
- exclusiv 6y ago
  You have a good counter. To add to "don't wear masks" though - WHO, CDC, Fauci all had poor and inaccurate guidance as well. It's like none of these experts have sane defaults when they don't know about something. Kind of hard to believe, really. Then when they're wrong - they say "oh yeah we lied, we didn't want a run on masks for health workers". Such BS. They didn't know non-surgical/non-(k)n95 masks could be useful. It's ok to admit when you're wrong. Better than saying you lied. Especially when there's enough distrust of government. The US administration is culpable. But so are the experts. People need to be able to trust their experts. Separately - I find it ridiculous we have people that are all about science, except when their agenda conflicts. We end up with exceptions for religion. Exceptions for protests. Exceptions for filming movies. Whatever. If you have enough influence or can cause enough outrage about something you can get your way. Nobody has the balls to take hard stances. They create these illogical plans based on who is influencing them. Is there any official who was consistent and pragmatic with their pandemic plan?
  - Rapzid 6y ago
    The CDC officially recommended the use of face masks in public places on April 3. That was forever ago and only a few weeks into the US crises(couple weeks after first lockdowns started). There absolutely was a PPE shortage at the time, and there absolutely was new information coming in about the efficacy of wearing non N95 masks. That's a lot of attribution to malice or incompetence for such a dynamic situation that shaped up in such a relatively short amount of time.. Meanwhile the current admin had their last maskless rally what, just in the past week or so?
    - exclusiv 6y ago
      My point is that if you're an expert that people are supposed to trust - you shouldn't make statements about things you don't know yet. You seem to be ok glossing over that because you want to talk about the current admin when I'm not even talking about that. I agree with the culpability there. Fauci - In March he said "there's no reason to be walking around with a mask" [1] The CDC and WHO were doing the same. Also regarding the lie, "“We were concerned the public health community, and many people were saying this, were concerned that it was at a time when personal protective equipment, including the N95 masks and the surgical masks, were in very short supply,” Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and public face head of the federal government’s coronavirus response, told The Street in an interview this week." [2] You can go utilitarian if you want and say that's cool. Maybe you are ok with them lying to you because you believe them and think that was their only option. My point stands that there's enough distrust of the government. I don't believe they should do that, connect a lie to experts we are supposed to trust, and I don't believe that was their only option to prevent a shortage. A lot of incompetence. #1 not having enough masks in the first place, replenishing our supply #2 talking about things they don't know and #3 because they were incorrectly claiming cloth masks weren't useful for the public, they ended up parlaying that into a lie to try and prevent a shortage. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23hvLiA2akE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23hvLiA2akE [2] https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/dr-fauci-admits-feds-initially-misled-about-face-masks-wanted-to-make-sure-health-care-workers-had-enough/ar-BB15A4kO https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/dr-fauci-admits-feds-initi...
jhayward 6y ago
No, they mean the administration that still hasn't provided for adequate PPE, that turned down the offer of another 100 million doses of the 95% efficacy Pfizer vaccine, which is available now, and instead bought 300 million doses of the Astra-Zenica 62% efficacy vaccine, which does not meet the task force's minimum efficacy requirements and will not be available until summer.
- ketamine__ 6y ago
  Wasn't minimum efficacy 50% or greater?
  - modmans2nd 6y ago
    seriosuly? You're arguing that what they did was OK because it was a little above minimum rather than going after the stuff that will help people in the US? They bought 300 million doses of a vaccine that is more relivant to the developing world.....
rootusrootus 6y ago
And even then, the first vaccine to be approved wasn't part of the warp speed program.

You mean the admin that funded and fast-tracked the development and trials?

You mean the admin that encouraged people not to wear masks? The one that downplayed the virus at every opportunity? The one that held rallies without masks required, but still had people sign waivers in case they got sick? Is it that one, or some other administration you’re thinking of?

exclusiv 6y ago
You have a good counter. To add to "don't wear masks" though - WHO, CDC, Fauci all had poor and inaccurate guidance as well. It's like none of these experts have sane defaults when they don't know about something. Kind of hard to believe, really. Then when they're wrong - they say "oh yeah we lied, we didn't want a run on masks for health workers". Such BS. They didn't know non-surgical/non-(k)n95 masks could be useful. It's ok to admit when you're wrong. Better than saying you lied. Especially when there's enough distrust of government. The US administration is culpable. But so are the experts. People need to be able to trust their experts. Separately - I find it ridiculous we have people that are all about science, except when their agenda conflicts. We end up with exceptions for religion. Exceptions for protests. Exceptions for filming movies. Whatever. If you have enough influence or can cause enough outrage about something you can get your way. Nobody has the balls to take hard stances. They create these illogical plans based on who is influencing them. Is there any official who was consistent and pragmatic with their pandemic plan?
- Rapzid 6y ago
  The CDC officially recommended the use of face masks in public places on April 3. That was forever ago and only a few weeks into the US crises(couple weeks after first lockdowns started). There absolutely was a PPE shortage at the time, and there absolutely was new information coming in about the efficacy of wearing non N95 masks. That's a lot of attribution to malice or incompetence for such a dynamic situation that shaped up in such a relatively short amount of time.. Meanwhile the current admin had their last maskless rally what, just in the past week or so?
  - exclusiv 6y ago
    My point is that if you're an expert that people are supposed to trust - you shouldn't make statements about things you don't know yet. You seem to be ok glossing over that because you want to talk about the current admin when I'm not even talking about that. I agree with the culpability there. Fauci - In March he said "there's no reason to be walking around with a mask" [1] The CDC and WHO were doing the same. Also regarding the lie, "“We were concerned the public health community, and many people were saying this, were concerned that it was at a time when personal protective equipment, including the N95 masks and the surgical masks, were in very short supply,” Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and public face head of the federal government’s coronavirus response, told The Street in an interview this week." [2] You can go utilitarian if you want and say that's cool. Maybe you are ok with them lying to you because you believe them and think that was their only option. My point stands that there's enough distrust of the government. I don't believe they should do that, connect a lie to experts we are supposed to trust, and I don't believe that was their only option to prevent a shortage. A lot of incompetence. #1 not having enough masks in the first place, replenishing our supply #2 talking about things they don't know and #3 because they were incorrectly claiming cloth masks weren't useful for the public, they ended up parlaying that into a lie to try and prevent a shortage. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23hvLiA2akE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23hvLiA2akE [2] https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/dr-fauci-admits-feds-initially-misled-about-face-masks-wanted-to-make-sure-health-care-workers-had-enough/ar-BB15A4kO https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/dr-fauci-admits-feds-initi...

jhayward 6y ago

No, they mean the administration that still hasn't provided for adequate PPE, that turned down the offer of another 100 million doses of the 95% efficacy Pfizer vaccine, which is available now, and instead bought 300 million doses of the Astra-Zenica 62% efficacy vaccine, which does not meet the task force's minimum efficacy requirements and will not be available until summer.

ketamine__ 6y ago
Wasn't minimum efficacy 50% or greater?
- modmans2nd 6y ago
  seriosuly? You're arguing that what they did was OK because it was a little above minimum rather than going after the stuff that will help people in the US? They bought 300 million doses of a vaccine that is more relivant to the developing world.....

rootusrootus 6y ago

And even then, the first vaccine to be approved wasn't part of the warp speed program.